Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

jorgegalindo.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 260 posts

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#141

Post by zarathustreal »

matt_heimer wrote: post #98
baazaa wrote: post #77

If we tallied up all technical projects in the Western world that failed, how many would be failing due to lack of kindness versus, say, straight-forwards incompetence? Because 100% fall in the latter category in my experience. One of the problems with engineers counter-signalling engineering values (like actual technical competence) is that we live in a world where those values are extremely underrated while every m…

I think you could argue that long term lack of kindness at all levels of an organization leads to organizational technical incompetence. It creates hostile work environment where employees don't feel valued which leads to talent attrition. Yes, only valuing kindness with valuing technical competence is not ideal but so is the inverse. You want both.

Yea I’d like to see some actual studies on that assertion, it has been the opposite in my experience.

Technical competence requires a certain amount of self-discipline and sacrifice. You don’t become competent just by doing the same things over and over, so experience alone is not competence. With self-discipline comes a healthy habit of self-motivation. You don’t need your employer “making you” feel valued, you derive a sense of accomplishment from doing good work. You know you’re valued because you’re literally valued (in dollars).

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#144

Post by karaterobot »

I agree that if you want to persuade people and be successful in the business world, being the smartest person in the room isn't the most important quality. Being the loudest and most confident is. Just say your opinions as though they are obvious facts, and if someone disagrees, ignore them and say your thing again with even more confidence. I do not do this—heaven forbid, I'm too kind to do that—but it's the characteristic I see most successful people sharing... if success is defined as organizational prominence and compensation, rather than more trivial heuristics like a history of your claims coinciding with reality.

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#145

Post by detourdog »

clarkdale wrote: post #34

"Being nice is the new punk" I would say helping others is incredibly punk. Such as responding to chat messages requesting help in some particular coding problem. So many people will direct them to a support queue, but I love taking time to understand their issue and help them out.

What is interesting about that is the an aspect of original punkers was a desire for respect as individuals. The come as you are was very welcoming. The repulsionist look I saw as an attempt to see only inner beauty in humans.

Punk was the reaction of the individual vs. the global machine. The global machine’s surface is nice but the machine is not kind.

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#146

Post by CM30 »

baazaa wrote: post #77

If we tallied up all technical projects in the Western world that failed, how many would be failing due to lack of kindness versus, say, straight-forwards incompetence? Because 100% fall in the latter category in my experience. One of the problems with engineers counter-signalling engineering values (like actual technical competence) is that we live in a world where those values are extremely underrated while every m…

And how many would be from incompetence in terms of execution vs poor planning and a lack of knowledge about what's actually needed to complete the project?

Feels like the majority of those well-known failures (the 'we spent $5 billion+ and spent 10 years on something that should have taken a few years and maybe a tenth of that budget ones) come from either management who has no idea what they want, planning that hasn't taken into account even half the obstacles the project will need to overcome, or dozens of leaders all trying to make their mark.

Actual technical/work incompetence probably plays some part, but it's probably less of a matter of "people weren't honest enough about the quality of other people's work" and more of a matter of "we hired the cheapest possible team to do the work, and they weren't qualified in the slightest".

Bonus points for the leader of that team being the nephew/niece/relative of some guy in charge of the project.

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#147

Post by bjornsing »

To be honest I’ve come to see these posts as part of the “war”. If you’re not very smart, what’s your best move? Change the rules. Now you can be the most noteworthy person in the room, by being the kindest.

With that said, of course you should be kind. But don’t be afraid to be smart too. The world needs smart.

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#148

Post by jmull »

codelikeawolf wrote: post #59

Ever since that back and forth about "East Coast being kind vs West Coast being nice" thing a while back[1], I think it's important to distinguish the two. Because they are noticeably different (at least to me) and shouldn't be used interchangeably. I want someone to be kind to me in a meeting. I think niceness could seriously inhibit progress. A kind person will tell me that an idea I have won't work, but they'll of…

Honestly, I think it’s a mistake to try to retroactively impose a technical distinction between two words that have been synonyms for quite a while.

The intent is probably to clarify and communicate better. But with that word choice you end up confusing and muddying. The problem is, people have to know exactly what you mean already (which means you probably don’t have that much to talk about on that topic anyway).

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#149

Post by mjburgess »

jl6 wrote: post #7

Another way of putting it might be that there’s very little you can do to will yourself to be smarter, but you don’t have to go far out of your way to be kind. (Personally I’m not sure “kindness” is necessarily the right word that encompasses the four qualities listed. Resolutive? Seems like that’s something independent.)

And, really, it's self-congratulatory. It says only, "be like me, i'm great". And in refusing to translate "De tó sabe, pero de ná entiende" -- how empathetic is the writer really?

All together, it comes across a little smug.

Re: Do not try to be the smartest in the room; try to be the kindest

#150

Post by jmull »

baazaa wrote: post #77

If we tallied up all technical projects in the Western world that failed, how many would be failing due to lack of kindness versus, say, straight-forwards incompetence? Because 100% fall in the latter category in my experience. One of the problems with engineers counter-signalling engineering values (like actual technical competence) is that we live in a world where those values are extremely underrated while every m…

Incompetence isn’t a root cause though. You have to go deeper… why were the people involved in the project incompetent?

If you find a project was held back by infighting, siloed groups, major shifts in direction or key people leaving, kindness will help with all of these things.

The reality is, people working as individuals, no matter how competent those individuals are, can only accomplish things within the scope of a single person. There are some things like that, but there are many things that are not. To accomplish any of those things, people need to work together, in a complementary way, toward a common goal. That just won’t happen if they don’t get along. Social competence can become just as important as technical competence. Kindness is part of that.

Post reply on HN